RE: [Axiom-mail] Re: noweb

[Page, Bill]

On Tuesday, August 08, 2006 5:29 PM Ralf Hemmecke wrote:

> Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> ...
> > Let's keep it simple.  We have Axciom developers, and
> > axiom users. Axiom developers are those who work directly
> > on Axiom's source files. Axiom users are those who install
> > Axiom for their use.
> 
> Hmm, for the moment, developers + users is OK for me. But
> as I said, a user who writes a new library and extends Axiom
> need not have any knowledge about how Axiom is build. However,
> in some sense you are right, extension of the Axiom library
> makes him a 'developer', in particular if he plans to give
> the sources to the Axiom project.

In general I agree but we should return to Gaby's question
about: mnt/linux/src/algebra. It seems to me this definition
of Axiom users means that noweb is "in" and these .spad files
are "out". If we distribute mnt/linux/src/algebra at all, then
it should probably contain the original *.spad.pamphlet files,
not the notangle'd files.

Resolving the following issues:

http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/144

and

http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/116

might mean modifying both ')sh' and hyperdoc to point to the
appropriate <<chunk>> within the appropriate *.spad.pamphlet
file. And modifying ')co to allow a reference to a chunk name,
like this:

)compile manip.spad.pamphlet \
   )chunk <<package FACTFUNC FactoredFunctions>>

This command would require notangle functionality. If we could
assume a noweb-aware text editor (e.g. emacs) then the ')ed'
command could also be appropriately extended. And Tim's 'document'
script also makes sense in this context.

But of course this makes some assumptions about the actually user
interface, i.e. that it will remain something like the current
command line interface. These issues might be resolved differently
in a more advanced interface (e.g. a web browser-based user
interface).

> Otherwise we don't care anyway.
> 
> Maybe I just wanted to say: if someone wants to extend the 
> Axiom library there is no need to download all of the Axiom
> sources. A few things would be enough. But I guess, it's too
> early to think about that.
> 

I am not sure if we really "don't care", nor that it is "too
early" to think about this. I believe that Tim Daly's vision
is that literate programming methodology should be embedded into
Axiom at a deep level. It is supposed to be the medicine that
prevents the code rot that has occurred in the Axiom library
over the last 20- years from happening again over the next
20+ years.

Regards,
Bill Page.